Re-shaping the Conservative Party: Will you still need a “big tent” if you kick these factions out?

As the Conservative Party looks for a new leader and seeks to rebuild after the 2015 election defeat, there’s plenty of talk about reaching out to new voters, changing policies and, unfortunately, excluding some groups that have up until now been part of the conservative coalition.

As an outsider, never a member of the Conservative Party but interested in the success of conservative ideals in the political sphere, I’d like to put forward some thoughts.

Every political party is a coalition of different factions coming together Different under a common umbrella to try and advance an agenda. These factions don’t agree on every issue but as the old axiom goes, my 80% friend is not my 20% enemy.

Some think that with the defeat of the Conservative Party in the 2015 federal election there must be a purge and the only way to succeed is to focus on one issue over all others.

I explain with numbers and facts, why I disagree with that. Strongly.

Deciding that after a decade of being the ruling party, and losing to a highly organized “Anybody but Harper” left-wing coalition, means you must jettison parts of your coalition would be a mistake.

A party is about more than one issue. Those who claim a big tent but still want to exclude others – particularly social conservative issues – have not thought things through.

Is the lesson of 2015 to throw aside certain parts of the conservative coalition that helped the Conservative Party win in 2006, 2008 and 2011?

By the way, the gentleman at the end of the above video is none other than Dean Kenyon. He is the man that LITERALLY wrote the book on evidence of abiotic (non-creation) origins of life. He is now a Christian.

This beautiful seven day old baby girl was born premature at 23 weeks. Had her mother so chosen, she would have been subjected to an abortion procedure called D & E (Dilation and Evacuation). Her limbs would have been ripped off one at a time and her little head would have been crushed as part of the abortion procedure. Let’s assume she was the product of rape and/or incest. Before crushing her tiny head, which of her limbs should be removed first pro-choicers?

In my EDA, one senior Executive BOD member strongly believed that the message from the election was to discard past policies and in particular, ostracize social conservatives from the Party, particularly those who do not support abortion without any restriction whatsoever.

That senior BOD member even suggested that Stephen Harper should not be permitted to speak at the national convention on May 26-28, 2016, since it would send the ‘wrong message’ to Canadians that the Party hasn’t ‘learned its lesson’.

After bringing conservatives together to form a new party in 2003, building its support to form the national government in 2006 though to 2015, is this how we thank the leader of the Party? No!

Small “c” conservatives and Conservative Party of Canada members alike should be (and I am) deeply thankful for Stephen Harper’s strong leadership in bringing conservatives together, leading us out of the political wilderness and running a principled, efficient, effective and virtually scandal-free government.

No need to abandon the social conservative ideas from the party. We still won close to 100 seats so all we need to do is stick to the core values. We need to hammer away at the Liberals on the economy as no doubt it will be in a mess by the time the next election comes around. Stick to what is important to all Canadians and stay away from the divisive issues that the Liberals and the Media Party like to use against us.

The Conservative Party of Canada has a big task ahead of it: to choose a leader and a message that is true to its purpose. To deliberately exclude any policy discussion on an issue such as abortion seems a bit much. But the Party has to explore its choices. Maybe there is no room in Canada for a genuinely conservative political movement that allows for vigorous discussion of important social issues.

While the party traits has always been inclusiveness. Because it carries the name conservative. Any individual who has an ideology outside of this realm should never apply for membership. It basically defeats the very purpose this party was formed in true representation of those values. Real conservatives really believe that the way to prospering citizens is through fiscal restraints when allocating its citizens taxes responsibly.

When governments spend their time on helping its citizens prosper, everyone prospers and not a select few. Money begins to flow for its citizens to purchase more, and thereby developing a robust economy. It also helps citizens to invest in companies and savings for their families. Wild spending with no regard for the future of its citizens taxes, to benefit the government individuals who serve the people only sends one message. Selfish greed of a few individuals, and it generally ends up with the people serving those individuals, and not the other way around. No government has ever succeeded in this realm because it always leads to one path. It is called slavery. Our friends to the south of us experienced this heavily. Thank God for brave men like Abe Lincoln who stood up to these tyrants, and began a real liberty for its people.

We witnessed this deception here in Alberta when Alison Redford was given the provinces cheque book, and decided to take trips all around the world. Building a castle for her and her daughter. We are seeing this with Justin Trudeau as he decides to take his vacations (after just a short period of sitting in office as leader of the party) when and where he wants, after only being in office a short period of time.

With the same breath this liberal party had condemned the conservative party leader over senate issues of spending, and telling Canadians that this same government is selecting only the rich in allocations of family tax credits. While Trudeau is being paid one of the largest salaries in the free democratic world. He believes it is okay for his family to receive funding for two nannies. True Liberalism never allows one citizen to enter slavery for another citizen. When you spend wildly a citizens hard earned income without any regard for his hard earned income. You are actually beginning the process of slavery. It is no longer liberty for its citizens.

Citizens can never build a country with empty pockets. It is the way a select few at the top like it. Most citizens would never hand their credit card, cheque book, or cash over to someone who loves to spend wildly, especially on themselves. Why would our government be any different. It is the real reason this country needs a real conservative thinking, and practising government who does and practice what it
professes. We had this with PM Harper. Despite the ramblings of the opposition. It was reported by two major newspapers. One in Canada and the other in the U.S., that for the first time in Canadian history under his direction. Canada had surpassed the U.S. in middle income earnings. When you throw out the baby with the bath water it generally leads to one thing.

The failure is the CPC is obviously because it is not a conservative party and never was one. Of course, Harper was the perfect CINO to lead this fraud, with his boutique tax cuts and explicit denial of every single conservative principle in existence. Harper is a mongoloid idiot leading a pack of CINO mongoloids.

The likes of Ambrose and Rempel would see the CPC become a subsidiary of the Liberals, as every single conservative left in the CPC will be ousted.

Christensen and Penson are so far left of the center they don’t recognise centrist politics and ideals when they are exposed to them. As 2 dupes of repackaged Marxism, your opinions on conservatism are about as applicable as a whore’s opinions on virtue.

The big tent party is a good idea, there is strength in combining the ideals of fiscal accountability (Heyak) economics, with populism, inclusive democracy, libertarianism, and classic (Adam Smith-Kennedy) liberalism – attracting radical collectivist/compulsive statism ideas into this strong liberty-based big tent is a recipe for disaster – compulsive leftism has destroyed every institution and nation it infects and you don’t need it in the last remaining centrist party in this nation. Neither can you afford to alienate social conservatives and western reformers.

Laughable that the leftists (“useful idiots” for the elite’s socialist utopian cause) chime in that the conservative party needs to become more “progressive”! As if they really care about the fortunes of a conservative party! Laughable, but also the insidious design of the leftists outside the party and worse those who have infiltrated the party to morph the party so that it never will be elected. With the desired outcome that the march of the cultural Marxism transforming the culture will not be impeded, but, in fact, will be accelerated.

The Conservatives lost for two reasons. First of all, Harper couldn’t shake the fact that Duffy was “his” appointment. Second, a sufficiently large chunk of the voting population decided it wanted cute instead of capable. One way or the other, time will fix both of those things.

Pretty much bang on Sean. I would say a return to the “progressive” part of the conservative party is needed. The wignuts had their day and Canadians rejected them—and rightly so. There isn’t much to pick from from a stagnant pool of potential leaders.

Sean, I think your needle is stuck yet again.
Similar words were spoken in the past in Pierre Trudeau’s day and he was eventually dethroned. Given enough time history will repeat itself because eventually the bills will become past due (as before) and then the Sheeple will awaken once again and the Liberal Emperor will be exposed as wearing no clothes as before.

The Conservatives will easily loose the next election, as the honeymoon for Justin seems to have no end.

The honeymoon will eventually come to an end, but not till well after the next election. So, for the Liberals, all is well.

The Conservatives need to become more centrist and humane. Under Harper, they were portrayed as very, very far right and very inhumane in its treatment of the poor and disadvantaged, especially in regards to its treatment of First Nations, refugees, and veterans.

I’m not saying that the far right “Reform Party” type of Conservatives should be silenced, but they shouldn’t be the centre of attention. They already had their time in the sun, and failed miserably. It’s time that Red Tories and other moderates better reassert themselves.

Canadians, overall, are far too progressive to support a party that is opposed to marijuana and running deficits. Canadians will never tolerate a party that questions the right to abortion and euthanasia. And Canadians will never go back on same sex issues.

The Liberals could be vulnerable with the overall debt levels affecting the federal government, citizenship and immigration (overall), internal security, foreign policy and the Armed Forces. Oh yes, the legal system and Senate may still be issues next election.

The logical starting point is to start with an understanding of conservative values and principle. A “progressive” Conservative party, progressive on social issues and conservative on financial issues is nothing less than a half-baked conservative. There appear to some in the CPC who are trying to push the party in that direction, particularly interim leader Rona Ambrose (who as ‘interim’ in my view should be adopting a more neutral posture) and Michelle Rempel. They are fools if they think such a move will advance their fortunes! Social issues shape the culture and, as is apparent with the popularity of a socialist candidate for president in the U.S, bowing to political correctness (cultural Marxism) will not pay dividends but, instead, will mean that the party will never have the possibility of being elected, will spell the demise of conservatism in Canada. Fools.

These persons may have the energy to make Canada great again…
Don Cherry – very outspoken and doesn’t yield to political correct bull$%&#. Canada’s next leader either needs a businessman or a coach and not a politician.

Clive Beddoe – Has the power to give Canada a great name. He’s South African by birth. Afterall he made Westjet great and a very serious competitor to Air Canada. Canada needs a businessman and not a politician.

Ted Cruz – Nah! Although Canadian born Canadian voters won’t go for him.

The Conservatives vetting process obviously needs to be revamped. Then the long process of exterminating the Liberals that managed to waltz their way into the party. Don’t look back, don’t dare to bring back the likes of Peter Gordon MacKay or Don Baird. Good Conservatives, both. But they jumped ship at the wrong time.

Question to Rebel readers: Are there any potential Conservative leader candidates strong enough to win the next election? I personally like Rona Ambrose but any of the other names being raised…not so much.
What do you think?

In Canada, there are fewer than 1000 infants up for adoption. Sounds good right? Nope, the number is so low because abortion is so popular. As a gay man with a paternal instinct, I think that is a huge tragedy, especially because in Canada, gay couples aren’t at odds with social conservatism like in the U.S. I love family and want Canadian families to be strong and headed by 2 parents. You have to be pro-choice to even join the Liberal party, we have to stop them.